Jeff Matthews

Folks, my challenge is up in the previous post. Fish, you grew up in Nashville or Austin, right? LOL!

"Locomotive Breath" by Tull Next: "She's a poor man's rich girl and she'll do it for a song. She's a rich man stealer but her favour's good and strong: She's the Robin Hood of Highgate -- helps the poor man get along."

Fish, Fish, Fish....... Just behind Michael by that much. That's what you get you "Long Haired Country Boy." You and Charlie Daniels can go hang out in Austin or Nashville where ya'll think that's rock.!

Shamefully...... after having to have a hint..... "Trampled under Foot" by LZ. Next: "If youre driftin on an empty ocean With no wind to fill your sail, The future, your horizon, Its like searchin for the holy grail." Name that Tune!

Yeah, I meant to leave room in my comments for improper set-up. Remember the loudness button on those old receivers (maybe new ones have them, too)? It sounded like 6x the loudness button. Wondering why anyone would want a sub, except for HT or rap, though. Can't $900 speakers produce enough bass?

Ah! I see. If I was told this sort of thing in a more vulgar form, and if my job was to be king/queen, where as such, a modicum of decorum was expected in my "presence," I'd, I'd, I'd........... BAN the SOB! Really, no joke! Don't know that I'd ban him if it was said to another member, though. Some folks just deserve a higher decorum than others IMO. The moderator is definitely in that category when it comes to forums.

Jimmy, that might go to show that Amy is alot more tolerant than she might otherwise be. And, of course, there are degrees of everything. Nothing new about that.

I was not trying to pin any of those on you. I have no idea about how many have been banned, etc. And, for all I know, I might agree with you for banning the guy. Like I said, I don't know what he said. So, please do not be quick to jump to conclusions about what I am saying and try to extend them beyond more than I said. I am in no real position to judge, but thought I might give some comments in relation to general policies. It is censorsorship, though. A definition of "censor" is "ban: forbid the public distribution of." Your contract, for what it is worth, expressly provides you the right to censor. I see no real problem having that right - and even exercising it from time to time in the right circumstances. You must have thought that by me saying it is censorship, I was saying you were doing it unfairly. Not necessarily so. Also, I agree that CONGRESS shall make no laws... my comments are that the government's policy was a good one and could be used as a guide. Some others refer to a contract we made. Interesting. I wonder if I had a restaurant, if I could put a sign on the door that said, "By entering, you agree, represent and warrant that you are Caucasian." Does anyone think the contract would be enforceable? Just a law school lesson on how pliable these concepts of contracts and liberties are. Again, the analogy is in no way meant to be extended to mean your policy is anywhere near close to something like that. Just food for thought in terms of exercising your powers and construing your contract, which you might have done correctly. And finally, I'll reiterate to make clear, Amy. Who knows? I might have banned the guy, too. Anybody care to repeat what he said in maybe a more diplomatic manner?

I would also like to echo the comments that folks on this thread are, by and large, very helpful and friendly, and we have alot of fun. So, I do think the forum good. Is it because banning occurs alot, or are bad people just not finding their ways here?

I seem to recall in my first thread (the infamous Ratings thread) a member getting upset enough to threaten lawsuits, to which the "offender" (very wittingly) offered up Judge Judy's phone number. I say the best thing to do was let these folks banter it out. All the time, we encounter people who are rude or say things that offend. That's life. I'm glad we're in America, where the right to express one's own non-sense was guaranteed in the First Amendment. Too bad some private institutions don't feel the same way about public speech. I'm not a big fan of banning people from what is supposed to be a "forum." They should get to say whatever nonsense they want to - so long as it is not too extreme, like threats of physical harm or crime, or profanity, etc. So how bad was DF's conduct to justify a ban? BTW: Call me anything but late for supper. []

I heard a Klipsch sub with the F3's at Best Buy. It really made rock-n-roll unrealistic. Just WAY too much bass. Would have been good for rap or movie explosions/earthquakes, etc. Just not rock.

Ever heard the saying, "practice makes perfect?" It doesn't apply to this guy.

I just saw your recent post that hit before my reply. The lightest sanding is done using the paper with the highest grit number. 60 is coarse, 120 is fine. Use the highest grit you can buy. Also, you really might try my polyurethane suggestion. A thick, shiny, glossy sheen will make the poop not look like poop. []

I would not try to sand them at all unless absolutely necessary. The veneer is thin, and yes, you can sand it a little, but keep in mind that after sanding you have a thinner veneer left. Then, if they get scratched or dinged and future sanding is necessary, you'll have no room left to sand again. Sand veneer only when absolutely necessary. Your pictures show nice-looking speakers by the way. They are not too dark at all. You say they look a little dull. You might try a very, very, very light sand - just to smooth out the fingerprints. [] Then, you could apply 4 or 5 coats of polyurethane with light buffing in between coats to make them shiny. I've never heard anyone tell me you could lighten wood that is already stained. If you find something, patent it. Try whatever suggestions you want - but on a piece of scrap wood. You can stain the scrap dark and then play with it to see if you can get it to lighten. Allow the scrap to dry thoroughly after you apply the dark stain; otherwise, it might not be a fair test. I'd almost be willing to bet that you can't lighten it.

Sputnik, thanks. That was a very clever trick. The reasoning was so simple, but I immediately blocked out trying to figure it out because at each new iteration, the symbols were all changed. When I was playing, I had NO IDEA they were changing the symbols. The changing of the symbols was the big slight of hand. Otherwise, the same symbol would have always been picked, and the trick would have become obvious.

Okay, now that's intriguing! The first try was wrong, but about 6 or 7 tries after the first were all right. Then, I stopped. Who can tell us how this works?

My God, Man! Leaving us like that with an obscure tune. That'll be ONE demerit!

My Crown Microtech 1200, or Duke's Crown K-2. These'll knock the doors down. I'm sure there are plenty of other good amps, but I stopped caring to follow them when I got my Crown 20 years ago. Awesome punch!

Tell that to meagain in the 2-channel (I bought Klipschorns) thread. Meagain is running an HK receiver with newsed KHorns, and I've been trying to say it will not do the KHorns justice.

Well, the Best Buy Klipsch demo works today. Guess the read our thread. Checked out their best on display, the F3. Not too impressive when compared to Corns and Khorns - and even Chorus.

Okay, but if they max out at 121dB, then why have any amp over 64 watts? I assume headroom for peaks wouldn't make a difference because if they're maxed out, you can't go beyond max, no?

Thanks, Marvel. I get the design but do not get why they ever switched to designing them that way. Seems pointless to me. But probably the novelty of forever turning volume knobs was thought to be an attractive feature - I guess.

I am sure others make amps as good as the Crown, but for 20 years I've enjoyed the snot out of it, and it's been my end-all. I still maintain there a many people on this forum with good Heritage Klipsch that have really never heard them let go. I also would still maintain many would wet their pants when listening to them being driven by a good Crown. Definitely way above the consumer receiver quality. Duke, buddy, what say ye? Would they wet their pants? .....

Cal, sounds like science to me, but I am still lost because why do they make even a 65w amp? Why didn't you buy a 1-watt amp if you listen to .75 watts? That part makes no sense to me. I think something is being left out here - something very major....